View clinical trials related to Colonoscopy.
Filter by:This is a noninferiority study designed to examine whether conscious sedation with midazolam alone results in efficacy and safety that is not inferior to the combination of midazolam and fentanyl. English-speaking patients ≥18 years old and ≤75 years old presenting for GI endoscopy planned with conscious sedation using midazolam and fentanyl, will be randomized 1:1 to single agent sedation with midazolam or combination sedation with midazolam and fentanyl. Participants will be blinded to the choice of sedation. Sedation quality and adverse events will be measured with a validated patient-centered measure of procedural sedation quality, the PROcedural Sedation Assessment Survey (PROSAS) [Leffler, et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81(1):194-203]. Endoscopic quality measures in the 2 study groups will be collected by retrospective chart review, as an additional metric to ensure the quality of the procedure is not compromised by the choice of sedation.
This is a study to compare the left colon mucus production between carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation and water exchange (WE) colonoscopy in patients that require a routine or repeat colonoscopy. There will be four arms in this study: CO2 insufflation (control group 1), WE with water infusion (control group 2), WE with 50% saline infusion (study group 1), and WE with 25% saline infusion (study group 2). The patient will prepare himself/herself for the colonoscopy as per normal instructions and he/she will be given the information for the study at that time so that he/she can make a decision to participate in the study. The WE control group will use sterile water filling during colonoscope insertion. The study method will use saline filling during colonoscopy insertion. This study will confirm if using the saline infusion is a better method in reducing mucus production when WE colonoscopy is used.
This was a prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial comparing three sedative regimens for outpatient colonoscopy.
In order to obtain the risk level of patients with intestinal insufficiency through simple indicators, many foreign scholars have studied and developed their own prediction models. However, the current guideline indicates that there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of a specialized predictive model for clinical practice.There are few studies on external validation of existing prediction models.
The total incidence of abdominal pain after colonoscopy is almost 50%. Butorphanol is a mixed opioid receptor agonist-antagonist, which has strong sedative and analgesic effects. This clinical study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of butorphanol combined with propofol for colonoscopy to reduce postoperative visceral pain, and provide a basis for improving the quality of surgery and comfortable medical treatment for patients.
The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of BLI4900 bowel preparation to an FDA-approved control as 2-day, split-dose bowel preparations prior to colonoscopy in adult patients.
The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of BLI4900 bowel preparation to an FDA-approved control as 2-day, split-dose bowel preparations prior to colonoscopy in adult patients.
This controlled-randomized trial compares the artificial intelligence Genius® system assisted (Genius+) to standard (Genius-) colonoscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of Genius® system on ADR in routine colonoscopy. The secondary aims will be the impact of Genius® system on polyp detection rate (PDR), serrated polyp detection rate (SPDR), advanced neoplasia detection rate (ANDR), mean number of polyps (MNP), polyp type and localization, and operator type (according to basal ADR).
The rate of adequate bowel preparation is one of important quality indicators of colonoscopy. Inadequate bowel preparation negatively affects the outcomes of colonoscopy. If patients with inadequate bowel preparation were identified before the procedure, enhanced strategy could be offered to achieve better bowel cleaning. Currently, there were three predicting models of inadequate bowel preparation established based on patient-related factors. So far, none of predictive models have been tested in other than their validation cohort populations, and no study has attempted to apply a different regimen to patients presenting with risk factors for inadequate colon cleanliness. In previous studies, we established a prediction model based on procedure-related factors, which has better accuracy and can better predict the quality of bowel preparation. The aim of this study is to compare the quality of bowel preparation by using a predictive model based on procedure-related factors versus the criterion group in unsedation patients
The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of multilevel factors on the quality of screening colonoscopy, reflected mainly by adenoma detection rate (ADR).